Performance of a consensus-based algorithm for diagnosing anastomotic leak after minimally invasive esophagectomy for esophageal cancer

被引:3
|
作者
Lemmens, Jobbe [1 ]
Klarenbeek, Bastiaan [1 ]
Verstegen, Moniek [1 ]
van Workum, Frans [1 ,2 ]
Hannink, Gerjon [3 ]
Ubels, Sander [1 ]
Rosman, Camiel [1 ,4 ]
机构
[1] Radboud Univ Nijmegen, Radboud Inst Hlth Sci, Med Ctr, Dept Surg, Nijmegen, Netherlands
[2] Canisius Wilhelmina Hosp, Dept Surg, Nijmegen, Netherlands
[3] Radboud Univ Nijmegen, Radboud Inst Hlth Sci, Med Ctr, Dept Operating Rooms, Nijmegen, Netherlands
[4] Radboud Univ Nijmegen, Med Ctr, POB 9101, NL-6500 HB Nijmegen, Netherlands
关键词
algorithm; anastomotic leak; diagnosis; minimally invasive esophagectomy; postoperative complications; ESOPHAGOGASTRIC ANASTOMOSIS; COMPUTED-TOMOGRAPHY; COMPLICATIONS; ENDOSCOPY; TIME;
D O I
10.1093/dote/doad016
中图分类号
R57 [消化系及腹部疾病];
学科分类号
摘要
Anastomotic leak (AL) is a common and severe complication after esophagectomy. This study aimed to assess the performance of a consensus-based algorithm for diagnosing AL after minimally invasive esophagectomy. This study used data of the ICAN trial, a multicenter randomized clinical trial comparing cervical and intrathoracic anastomosis, in which a predefined diagnostic algorithm was used to guide diagnosing AL. The algorithm identified patients suspected of AL based on clinical signs, blood C-reactive protein (cut-off value 200 mg/L), and/or drain amylase (cut-off value 200 IU/L). Suspicion of AL prompted evaluation with contrast swallow computed tomography and/or endoscopy to confirm AL. Primary outcome measure was algorithm performance in terms of sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values (PPV, NPV), respectively. AL was defined according to the definition of the Esophagectomy Complications Consensus Group. 245 patients were included, and 125 (51%) patients were suspected of AL. The algorithm had a sensitivity of 62% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 46-75), a specificity of 97% (95% CI: 89-100), and a PPV and NPV of 94% (95% CI: 79-99) and 77% (95% CI: 66-86), respectively, on initial assessment. Repeated assessment in 19 patients with persisting suspicion of AL despite negative or inconclusive initial assessment had a sensitivity of 100% (95% CI: 77-100). The algorithm showed poor performance because the low sensitivity indicates the inability of the algorithm to confirm AL on initial assessment. Repeated assessment using the algorithm was needed to confirm remaining leaks.
引用
收藏
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Outcomes of Minimally Invasive and Robot-Assisted Esophagectomy for Esophageal Cancer
    Banks, Kian C.
    Hsu, Diana S.
    Velotta, Jeffrey B.
    CANCERS, 2022, 14 (15)
  • [42] Diagnosing conduit leak after esophagectomy for esophageal cancer by computed tomography leak protocol and standard esophagram: Is old school still the best?
    Palacio, Diana
    Marom, Edith M.
    Correa, Arlene
    Betancourt-Cuellar, Sonia L.
    Hofstetter, Wayne L.
    CLINICAL IMAGING, 2018, 51 : 23 - 29
  • [43] Implementation of minimally invasive esophagectomy in a tertiary referral center for esophageal cancer
    Nilsson, Magnus
    Kamiya, Satoshi
    Lindblad, Mats
    Rouvelas, Ioannis
    JOURNAL OF THORACIC DISEASE, 2017, 9 : S817 - S825
  • [44] Comparison of substernal and posterior mediastinal route of reconstruction after minimally invasive esophagectomy for esophageal cancer
    Dat, Tran Quang
    Thong, Dang Quang
    Nguyen, Doan Thuy
    Hai, Nguyen Viet
    Bac, Nguyen Hoang
    Long, Vo Duy
    LANGENBECKS ARCHIVES OF SURGERY, 2024, 409 (01)
  • [45] Consequences of anastomotic leaks after minimally invasive esophagectomy: A single-center experience
    Simitian, Grigor S.
    Hall, David J.
    Leverson, Glen
    Lushaj, Entela B.
    Lewis, Erik E.
    Musgrove, Kelsey A.
    McCarthy, Daniel P.
    Maloney, James D.
    SURGERY OPEN SCIENCE, 2023, 11 : 26 - 32
  • [46] Relay therapy with endovac and endoscopic stents for anastomotic leaks after minimally invasive esophagectomy
    Turchi, Matias Javier
    Llanos, Federico Luis
    Ramirez, Mauricio Gabriel
    Badaloni, Franco
    Nachman, Fabio
    Nieponice, Alejandro
    ANNALS OF ESOPHAGUS, 2022, 5
  • [47] Predictors of Anastomotic Leak After Esophagectomy for Cancer: Not All Leaks Increase Mortality
    Krasnoff, Chloe C.
    Grigorian, Areg
    Smith, Brian R.
    Jutric, Zeljka
    Nguyen, Ninh T.
    Daly, Shaun
    Lekawa, Michael E.
    Nahmias, Jeffry
    AMERICAN SURGEON, 2021, 87 (06) : 864 - 871
  • [48] Post-esophagectomy hiatal hernia following minimally invasive esophagectomy in esophageal cancer patients
    Chobarporn, Thitiporn
    Qureshi, Alia P.
    Hunter, John G.
    Wood, Stephanie G.
    SURGICAL ENDOSCOPY AND OTHER INTERVENTIONAL TECHNIQUES, 2025, 39 (04): : 2588 - 2596
  • [49] Management of intrathoracic and cervical anastomotic leakage after esophagectomy for esophageal cancer: a systematic review
    Verstegen, Moniek H. P.
    Bouwense, Stefan A. W.
    van Workum, Frans
    ten Broek, Richard
    Siersema, Peter D.
    Rovers, Maroeska
    Rosman, Camiel
    WORLD JOURNAL OF EMERGENCY SURGERY, 2019, 14 (1)
  • [50] Minimally invasive management of anastomotic leak after bariatric Roux-en-Y gastric bypass
    Ece, Ilhan
    Yilmaz, Huseyin
    Alptekin, Husnu
    Acar, Fahrettin
    Yormaz, Serdar
    Sahin, Mustafa
    JOURNAL OF MINIMAL ACCESS SURGERY, 2015, 11 (02) : 160 - 162